The philosophical and mathematical commentaries of Proclus on the first book of Euclid's elements (Vol. 1 of 2) : $b To which are added, A history of the restoration of Platonic theology, by the latter Platonists: And a translation from the Greek of Proclus's Theological elements
Plato · en
of a sensible object, and we should possess no sentient power capable
of perceiving the whole, or of pronouncing any thing one. Thus, in
the perception of a man, considered as one, how is it possible that
the soul can be divided, so that the perception of a part shall be
the same with the perception of the whole. But if we suppose the soul
divisible in all her perceptions, since it is impossible she should
be co-extended with every sentient object, in how many parts is the
division to be made? Is the soul to be distributed into the same number
of parts as the sensible object she perceives, so that every part of
the soul may perceive the same part of the object? Or shall we say that
the parts of the soul have no sensation of the parts of the object?
But this would be absurd and impossible. If every part then of the
soul perceived every part of a magnitude as a whole, since magnitude
is divisible to infinity, and since, on this hypothesis, there must
be innumerable sensations of every sensible object, there must be
innumerable images, as it were, of the same thing in our principal
part. Besides, if that which perceives is corporeal, it will not be
possible for it to perceive in any other manner than as if certain
images were impressed from a seal in wax, or in brass, or in any other
sensible substance. But if the images of sensation exist as in humid
bodies (which is most probable), they will certainly be confounded
like images in water; nor can there be any memory, the image departing
with its forming substance. And if we suppose the figures to remain
like impressions in solid bodies, either it will not be possible for
others to succeed while the former endure; and thus, sensations of
other things cannot take place; or if others succeed, the former images
must be immediately destroyed, and memory be no more. So that if we
allow it possible to remember, and, besides this, to perceive other
things, without any hindrance from former impressions, it is impossible
that the soul should be corporeal. Since the soul, therefore, is an
unextended, indivisible, and immaterial substance, it is consequently
incorruptible and immortal; for every thing capable of dissolution and
dispersion is either corporeal and composite, or exists in some subject
from which it is inseparable. And indeed, whatever may be dissolved
is corruptible, as being compounded from many. But whatever naturally
subsists in something different from itself, when it is separated
from its subject, immediately vanishes into non-entity. But the soul,
as we have proved, is incorporeal; it is likewise removed from every
subject, and naturally reverts to itself, and is therefore immortal and
incorruptible.